Consistency...
-
Or the lack thereof:
{
"token_data": {
"AccessToken": "eyJraWQiOi..."
}
}Look, either use underscores or don't. Make Request with JWT · massgov/LicenseValidationAPI Wiki · GitHub[^] I deal with idiots when I have to work with 3rd party API's.
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence Operators -
Or the lack thereof:
{
"token_data": {
"AccessToken": "eyJraWQiOi..."
}
}Look, either use underscores or don't. Make Request with JWT · massgov/LicenseValidationAPI Wiki · GitHub[^] I deal with idiots when I have to work with 3rd party API's.
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence OperatorsIf I'm not using Camel case, which I rarely stray from, I'll use underscores without a second thought.
Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
-
If I'm not using Camel case, which I rarely stray from, I'll use underscores without a second thought.
Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
But... do you mix the styles? X| X| Next you will say, you mix gin with water :doh: :doh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
But... do you mix the styles? X| X| Next you will say, you mix gin with water :doh: :doh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
I occasionally use underscores to follow low-level C++ conventions, like defining
signal_tormain_tas the type for a POSIX signal or the value returned bymain. And the name of a private data member ends in an underscore.Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
-
Or the lack thereof:
{
"token_data": {
"AccessToken": "eyJraWQiOi..."
}
}Look, either use underscores or don't. Make Request with JWT · massgov/LicenseValidationAPI Wiki · GitHub[^] I deal with idiots when I have to work with 3rd party API's.
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence Operators -
But... do you mix the styles? X| X| Next you will say, you mix gin with water :doh: :doh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Or the lack thereof:
{
"token_data": {
"AccessToken": "eyJraWQiOi..."
}
}Look, either use underscores or don't. Make Request with JWT · massgov/LicenseValidationAPI Wiki · GitHub[^] I deal with idiots when I have to work with 3rd party API's.
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence Operators -
But... do you mix the styles? X| X| Next you will say, you mix gin with water :doh: :doh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
But... do you mix the styles? X| X| Next you will say, you mix gin with water :doh: :doh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Or the lack thereof:
{
"token_data": {
"AccessToken": "eyJraWQiOi..."
}
}Look, either use underscores or don't. Make Request with JWT · massgov/LicenseValidationAPI Wiki · GitHub[^] I deal with idiots when I have to work with 3rd party API's.
Latest Articles:
Abusing Extension Methods, Null Continuation, and Null Coalescence OperatorsEither, you have to re-invent every wheel yourself ... Or you'll just have to be prepared for mixed styles. If you use libraries, type/class definitions, ... whatever developed by others than yourself, you better be prepared for accepting mixed styles with regard to casing, use of underscores, indentation rules (e.g. in header files - you will see them even if you don't see the source code of that library), commenting style (/* */ comment blocks, end-of-line comments, no comments, ...), use of abbreviations in identifiers, ... Sometimes you see conflicting styles even in a single product. The Win32 functions has a subset of functions taking all essential parameters as a single struct, headed by the struct size, so new extensions to the interface can add is parameter to the end of the struct; the size field indicates which version the caller wants to run. But most functions come in version Func, FuncEx, FuncExEx, ... FuncExExExExEx (yes, five times "Ex" has occurred!), each with its own parameter format/sequence. When your personal preference is strongly with the one style that is used the least, you end up bitching a lot "Why couldn't they always use..." when you type those Ex Ex Ex... In Norwegian culture, "Aunt Sophie" is a well known figure. Anyone who grew up in Norway since the 1950 knows Torbjørn Egner's "Cardamom Town"[^] story (it has been translated into many languages, so you might know it from your own childhood!). In this story, aunt Sophie is constantly complaining "If just people were like me, the world would be a much better place!" "Aunt Sophie's angry song"[^] is well know to every Norwegian child. Too bad I didn't find an English version! If you are accused of being an "Aunt Sophie", it means that you are unconditionally requiring everybody to follow your rules, your ideas of what people should think, how they should behave, and everything else, disregaring any counter argument. Being called an Aunt Sophie is certainly not meant as any sort of flattery! I would certainly not like such an accusation! So I accept reality. There are various established styles out there. You may, in the name of "consistency" cling to your own
-
tokenDon'tdata?
-
Either, you have to re-invent every wheel yourself ... Or you'll just have to be prepared for mixed styles. If you use libraries, type/class definitions, ... whatever developed by others than yourself, you better be prepared for accepting mixed styles with regard to casing, use of underscores, indentation rules (e.g. in header files - you will see them even if you don't see the source code of that library), commenting style (/* */ comment blocks, end-of-line comments, no comments, ...), use of abbreviations in identifiers, ... Sometimes you see conflicting styles even in a single product. The Win32 functions has a subset of functions taking all essential parameters as a single struct, headed by the struct size, so new extensions to the interface can add is parameter to the end of the struct; the size field indicates which version the caller wants to run. But most functions come in version Func, FuncEx, FuncExEx, ... FuncExExExExEx (yes, five times "Ex" has occurred!), each with its own parameter format/sequence. When your personal preference is strongly with the one style that is used the least, you end up bitching a lot "Why couldn't they always use..." when you type those Ex Ex Ex... In Norwegian culture, "Aunt Sophie" is a well known figure. Anyone who grew up in Norway since the 1950 knows Torbjørn Egner's "Cardamom Town"[^] story (it has been translated into many languages, so you might know it from your own childhood!). In this story, aunt Sophie is constantly complaining "If just people were like me, the world would be a much better place!" "Aunt Sophie's angry song"[^] is well know to every Norwegian child. Too bad I didn't find an English version! If you are accused of being an "Aunt Sophie", it means that you are unconditionally requiring everybody to follow your rules, your ideas of what people should think, how they should behave, and everything else, disregaring any counter argument. Being called an Aunt Sophie is certainly not meant as any sort of flattery! I would certainly not like such an accusation! So I accept reality. There are various established styles out there. You may, in the name of "consistency" cling to your own
-
I occasionally use underscores to follow low-level C++ conventions, like defining
signal_tormain_tas the type for a POSIX signal or the value returned bymain. And the name of a private data member ends in an underscore.Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
Greg Utas wrote:
the name of a private data member ends in an underscore.
You heathen. Everyone knows that
privatemember names begin with an underscore.Software Zen:
delete this; -
Greg Utas wrote:
the name of a private data member ends in an underscore.
You heathen. Everyone knows that
privatemember names begin with an underscore.Software Zen:
delete this;X| :laugh:
Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
-
Greg Utas wrote:
the name of a private data member ends in an underscore.
You heathen. Everyone knows that
privatemember names begin with an underscore.Software Zen:
delete this; -
:~ Everyone knows that identifiers starting with an underscore are reserved for the implementation.
Keep Calm and Carry On
It is reserved for those who implement things like the standard library that usually comes with your compiler. Using a beginning underscore for member names or inside a function is legal, but not recommended. But, that being said, when I write classes in the standard C++ format (all lowercase), I use a trailing underscore to distinguish member variables from local variables.
INTP "Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra "I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
-
:~ Everyone knows that identifiers starting with an underscore are reserved for the implementation.
Keep Calm and Carry On
Yes, but I relented on that issue in order to achieve a compromise on underscores. I didn't want underscores in the leading position at all, while Mr. Object wanted underscores to be prohibited unless they were in the leading position indicating scope. I use underscores in locals which for me are generally all lower case. I also use underscores in globals when the name includes an acronym:
ObjectABC_Factory, for example, whereABCis the acronym. Back story: My group has a naming convention and coding style document that is 1½ pages, and most of it recommends rather requires or prohibits. In fact, I think there's only one thing in it that is absolutely prohibited, and that's Hungarian notation. When we created this document in 2000, that was still quite a thing when doing Windows programming. The only place we allow it to be used is in argument names for callback functions, and they are recommended to use the same names as in the documentation. For what it's worth, we've never had a conflict between our use of leading underscores and any compiler in the last 20 years, and that's spread over tens of millions of lines of C, C++, and C# code.Software Zen:
delete this; -
Yes, but I relented on that issue in order to achieve a compromise on underscores. I didn't want underscores in the leading position at all, while Mr. Object wanted underscores to be prohibited unless they were in the leading position indicating scope. I use underscores in locals which for me are generally all lower case. I also use underscores in globals when the name includes an acronym:
ObjectABC_Factory, for example, whereABCis the acronym. Back story: My group has a naming convention and coding style document that is 1½ pages, and most of it recommends rather requires or prohibits. In fact, I think there's only one thing in it that is absolutely prohibited, and that's Hungarian notation. When we created this document in 2000, that was still quite a thing when doing Windows programming. The only place we allow it to be used is in argument names for callback functions, and they are recommended to use the same names as in the documentation. For what it's worth, we've never had a conflict between our use of leading underscores and any compiler in the last 20 years, and that's spread over tens of millions of lines of C, C++, and C# code.Software Zen:
delete this;Gary R. Wheeler wrote:
there's only one thing in it that is absolutely prohibited, and that's Hungarian notation
FTMFW! The worst shite ever dreamt up. I found a post about leading underscores which also pointed out that the trailing
__t_'s that I occasionally use are reserved in POSIX standards. Yawn.Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
-
:~ Everyone knows that identifiers starting with an underscore are reserved for the implementation.
Keep Calm and Carry On
k5054 wrote:
Everyone knows that identifiers starting with an underscore are reserved for the implementation.
Let me just check that I get this right now: Identifiers not starting with an underscore is for those modules that are not yet implemented. ... Did I get it right this time=?
-
Gary R. Wheeler wrote:
there's only one thing in it that is absolutely prohibited, and that's Hungarian notation
FTMFW! The worst shite ever dreamt up. I found a post about leading underscores which also pointed out that the trailing
__t_'s that I occasionally use are reserved in POSIX standards. Yawn.Robust Services Core | Software Techniques for Lemmings | Articles
Is that Apps Hungarian or Systems Hungarian? Systems Hungarian is indeed "The worst shite ever dreamt up", but Apps Hungarian I can understand even if I don't use it.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
